What small cities today could be major cities in the future? (vs., land)

[Akhenaton06]

Allllrighty then, didn't think it was quite that serious, but I'll bite.

Originally Posted by waronxmas

Already had their chance and it won't be happening again unless some sort of miracle happens.

Not sure what you mean by "already had their chance," but I think a little skirmish called the Civil War had something to do with it. Anyway, if you look at what's happening in the metro area now and the growth its experiencing, it definitely has the potential to become major in the future.

Nah, they seem content on staying exactly the way they are despite having many advantages with the type of industry there.

The very nature of the big driver of their economy ensures that they won't "stay exactly the way they are," regardless of what some may want.

Nope.

Good location, stable economy, above-average and steady growth...they have the ingredients.

Nice setting, but too far away from....anything.

Which means they have no nearby competition.

You care to offer some suggestions so I may likewise rip them to shreds?

[annie_himself]

Originally Posted by mcredux

If a city isn't already on the map by now, it likely never will be.

Raleigh-Durham-Cary is one of the few small cities that has the prerequisites to make the transition to a major US city. Give it 30 years, and it will be the most relevant southern city.

The US is incredibly young. Give it a short 300 years.

[dee936]

Nacogdoches,tx Tlyer,tx and lufkin, tx.

[PGKangrui]

Utah is growing like crazy right now. Provo and St George all have the potential to become big. Utah County has been growing at nearly 40% per decade for a while, and with close access to Salt Lake City, it will easily maintain that growth. Saint George could become a decent sized city if things continue to work out.

[waronxmas]

Originally Posted by Akhenaton06

Allllrighty then, didn't think it was quite that serious, but I'll bite.

I didn't think my post was all that serious, but rather just some observations.

Originally Posted by Akhenaton06

Not sure what you mean by "already had their chance," but I think a little skirmish called the Civil War had something to do with it. Anyway, if you look at what's happening in the metro area now and the growth its experiencing, it definitely has the potential to become major in the future.

You already answered the question asked at the beginning with the second part.

Charleston was once a major American city. Forget about the population it had prior to Civil War as it is irrelevant in modern. Antebellum Charleston was the de jure cultural and economic capital of the prewar South and was in fact where Secession was born. The city's direct role in starting that war is the main reason why it took almost half a century for it to recover from being effed up by Sherman's army. Atlanta got it bad in that war, but Charleston got it even worse.

It is also because of it's role in that war that during Reconstruction the government focused on Atlanta being rebuilt as it only symbolized the industrial South and lacked all of the political parts that Charleston had. The light went out on Charleston being a major city the minute after the last shell fell on it. You just cant recover from that type of PR nightmare.

That's not to say Charleston isn't an important american city. It is after all one of the country's oldest cities and lot of American history (good and bad) was made there. That's why it is now mainly a big tourism town/living museum to past glory. It is not even in conversation IMHO when talking about cities that will be major cities in the future unless it gets off that path and something drastic happens.

Originally Posted by Akhenaton06

The very nature of the big driver of their economy ensures that they won't "stay exactly the way they are, regardless of what some may want.

Refer to Birmingham 100 miles to the South. Despite having a great economy that could turn into something big, it doesn't do a bit of good unless the residents and local leadership have the desire to capitalize on that. Every single person I've met from Huntsville and from my time there tells me that they have no desire to become a major city (A&M Bulldog excluded of course). That's not a bad thing at all though. They have a good thing going right now and the city they have fits them just fine. There's nothing wrong with that at at.

Originally Posted by Akhenaton06

Good location, stable economy, above-average and steady growth...they have the ingredients.

A lot of cities have that, but a lot of cities don't have to compete with a resurgent major city 100 miles to it's South. Baton Rouge benefited economically and in population due to the aftermath of Katrina. If the worst fears in 2005 had been realized, and New Orleans was beyond repair, then I would be on board with the notion of Baton Rouge becoming a major city.

However the exact opposite is occurring and there is a big effort underway to not only rebuild the Big Easy physically, but get it back on the track of being a major big American city. New Orleans is already light years ahead of Baton Rouge interms of infrastructure in that regard, so it will be nothing but a up hill battle.

Now I could get behind the idea of Baton Rouge and New Orleans of one day forming a metroplex. If that were to occur though, Baton Rouge would play New Orleans' Fort Worth to Dallas/San Jose to San Francisco.

Originally Posted by Akhenaton06

Which means they have no nearby competition.

Which means they also have no nearby location to draw residents from. I think Boise will become better and better, I just don't see where they will get the residents from to be a major city.

Originally Posted by Akhenaton06

You care to offer some suggestions so I may likewise rip them to shreds?

Long week bruh or a little too much Pabst?

[DarkWolf]

For Cities in the Midwest and Northeast that have already peaked , i'll doubt will see them regain past there peak maybe 70% of it but not the full. The smaller cities like Stamford , New Rochelle , White Plains , New Brunswick ,Hackensack , Elizabeth , and King of Prussia will adsorb the population growths of the growing NYC City & Philly Metro , whether a city flops or booms will depend on how many Transit services it will have. All the cities listed above plan to construct Light Rail , Heavy Rail , or more Regional Rail stations over the next few decades and all have decent bus service.

[Akhenaton06]

Originally Posted by waronxmas

I didn't think my post was all that serious, but rather just some observations.



You already answered the question asked at the beginning with the second part.

Charleston was once a major American city. Forget about the population it had prior to Civil War as it is irrelevant in modern. Antebellum Charleston was the de jure cultural and economic capital of the prewar South and was in fact where Secession was born. The city's direct role in starting that war is the main reason why it took almost half a century for it to recover from being effed up by Sherman's army. Atlanta got it bad in that war, but Charleston got it even worse.

It is also because of it's role in that war that during Reconstruction the government focused on Atlanta being rebuilt as it only symbolized the industrial South and lacked all of the political parts that Charleston had. The light went out on Charleston being a major city the minute after the last shell fell on it. You just cant recover from that type of PR nightmare.

That's not to say Charleston isn't an important american city. It is after all one of the country's oldest cities and lot of American history (good and bad) was made there. That's why it is now mainly a big tourism town/living museum to past glory. It is not even in conversation IMHO when talking about cities that will be major cities in the future unless it gets off that path and something drastic happens.



Refer to Birmingham 100 miles to the South. Despite having a great economy that could turn into something big, it doesn't do a bit of good unless the residents and local leadership have the desire to capitalize on that. Every single person I've met from Huntsville and from my time there tells me that they have no desire to become a major city (A&M Bulldog excluded of course). That's not a bad thing at all though. They have a good thing going right now and the city they have fits them just fine. There's nothing wrong with that at at.




A lot of cities have that, but a lot of cities don't have to compete with a resurgent major city 100 miles to it's South. Baton Rouge benefited economically and in population due to the aftermath of Katrina. If the worst fears in 2005 had been realized, and New Orleans was beyond repair, then I would be on board with the notion of Baton Rouge becoming a major city.

However the exact opposite is occurring and there is a big effort underway to not only rebuild the Big Easy physically, but get it back on the track of being a major big American city. New Orleans is already light years ahead of Baton Rouge interms of infrastructure in that regard, so it will be nothing but a up hill battle.

Now I could get behind the idea of Baton Rouge and New Orleans of one day forming a metroplex. If that were to occur though, Baton Rouge would play New Orleans' Fort Worth to Dallas/San Jose to San Francisco.





Which means they also have no nearby location to draw residents from. I think Boise will become better and better, I just don't see where they will get the residents from to be a major city.



Long week bruh or a little too much Pabst?

OK, this isn't one of those exceedingly long analytical threads and I'm not sure why you're making it out to be one. This particular thread isn't worth long, drawn-out responses and frankly, I'm pretty surprised you're taking this route. It's really just one of those threads where you spout out the names of a couple of cities and move on. I have good reasons for citing the cities I did, I stand by them, and I'm moving on. For some reason I feel like this is the Atlanta forum where I post a simple comment in passing and get hounded by the race baiters there.

[Mezter]

Midland/Odessa,Texas

[Champ le monstre du lac]

Originally Posted by waronxmas

I didn't think my post was all that serious, but rather just some observations.

Charleston was once a major American city. Forget about the population it had prior to Civil War as it is irrelevant in modern. Antebellum Charleston was the de jure cultural and economic capital of the prewar South and was in fact where Secession was born. The city's direct role in starting that war is the main reason why it took almost half a century for it to recover from being effed up by Sherman's army. Atlanta got it bad in that war, but Charleston got it even worse.

It is also because of it's role in that war that during Reconstruction the government focused on Atlanta being rebuilt as it only symbolized the industrial South and lacked all of the political parts that Charleston had. The light went out on Charleston being a major city the minute after the last shell fell on it. You just cant recover from that type of PR nightmare.

That's not to say Charleston isn't an important american city. It is after all one of the country's oldest cities and lot of American history (good and bad) was made there. That's why it is now mainly a big tourism town/living museum to past glory. It is not even in conversation IMHO when talking about cities that will be major cities in the future unless it gets off that path and something drastic happens.

I would add to that, there isn't a whole lot of solid and buildable land around Charleston. It's low country surrounded by salt marshes, waterways, and eroding barrier islands. What would they do, build another New Orleans type city? Has that lesson not been learned yet? [rhetorical questions] It would take an army of Dutch engineers to make it plausable for Charleston to be a major metro area.

[Champ le monstre du lac]

Salt Lake City
Albuquerque (maybe)
Omaha
Oklahoma City
Raleigh-Durham
Austin (getting there, will no doubt cross the threshold soon)
Norfolk/VA Beach